Very well written and balanced piece Adam, well done. This section caught my eye:
"The conflicting challenge will be to understand the impact of these systems on less developed countries that may not yet be in a position to prioritize decarbonization. This tradeoff between decarbonization and the alleviation of energy poverty globally is incredibly complex and nuanced."
The fact that this tension exists belies the simplified claim that 'climate change means jobs', which gets banded around in mainstream discourse. Sure, jobs will be created building wind farms and decommissioning oil rigs. But what about existing jobs in poorer countries that export carbon-intensive manufactured goods to the EU? A 'just' energy transition must somehow protect or replace these, not cut the most vulnerable workers loose.
The points you make about the WTO exemptions are spot on, and that Bloomberg chart visualises the problem brilliantly. This all begs the question: Is there an historical example of border taxes leading to a unified global response to a common threat? I am not aware of one.
Your point on climate change leading to job creation is a really great one, Seb. I couldn't agree more about the importance of ensuring a just transition.
I find that particularly interesting in the context of rising U.S. nationalism (other countries are doing the same, but the U.S. under Trump is an easy example) as well, whereby domestic jobs are prioritized at the expense of workers in less developed countries.
To your point on border taxes - I'm left reflecting on whether there are any lessons to be learned from coordinated sanction initiatives (i.e. Iran or North Korea, for example) that could be applied to a CBAT. In the case of Iran, sanctions have done little to disincentivize the country's nuclear program and instead the impact has been on the country's population in the form of poor economic performance. That would reinforce your point that it is ultimately foreign workers who will bear the brunt of any CBAT.
Either way, I'm curious to see how the EU goes about implementing such a policy, and what second-order effects it creates.
Very well written and balanced piece Adam, well done. This section caught my eye:
"The conflicting challenge will be to understand the impact of these systems on less developed countries that may not yet be in a position to prioritize decarbonization. This tradeoff between decarbonization and the alleviation of energy poverty globally is incredibly complex and nuanced."
The fact that this tension exists belies the simplified claim that 'climate change means jobs', which gets banded around in mainstream discourse. Sure, jobs will be created building wind farms and decommissioning oil rigs. But what about existing jobs in poorer countries that export carbon-intensive manufactured goods to the EU? A 'just' energy transition must somehow protect or replace these, not cut the most vulnerable workers loose.
The points you make about the WTO exemptions are spot on, and that Bloomberg chart visualises the problem brilliantly. This all begs the question: Is there an historical example of border taxes leading to a unified global response to a common threat? I am not aware of one.
Your point on climate change leading to job creation is a really great one, Seb. I couldn't agree more about the importance of ensuring a just transition.
I find that particularly interesting in the context of rising U.S. nationalism (other countries are doing the same, but the U.S. under Trump is an easy example) as well, whereby domestic jobs are prioritized at the expense of workers in less developed countries.
To your point on border taxes - I'm left reflecting on whether there are any lessons to be learned from coordinated sanction initiatives (i.e. Iran or North Korea, for example) that could be applied to a CBAT. In the case of Iran, sanctions have done little to disincentivize the country's nuclear program and instead the impact has been on the country's population in the form of poor economic performance. That would reinforce your point that it is ultimately foreign workers who will bear the brunt of any CBAT.
Either way, I'm curious to see how the EU goes about implementing such a policy, and what second-order effects it creates.